news you won't find in the mainstream media

Public Responds to Turkey False Flag Media Blackout

Behind the Russian Rage

As the old saying goes, you cannot truly understand a man until you have walked a mile in his shoes.

Perhaps Americans, a fortunate tribe, should try to see the world from the vantage point of the Russian people and Vladimir Putin, and, as the poet Robert Burns said, “see ourselves as others see us.”

At 35, Putin was a rising star in the elite secret police, the KGB, of a superpower with a worldwide empire.

The USSR was almost three times as large as the United States. Its European quadrant was half of the Old Continent. The Soviet Empire extended from the Elbe River in Central Germany to the Bering Strait across from Alaska. It encompassed thirteen time zones.

North to south, the USSR reached from above the Arctic Circle down to the Middle East. Beyond the contiguous empire were Soviet bases from Cam Ranh Bay in Vietnam to Tartus in Syria to Cienfuegos in Cuba.

Consider, then, what the last dozen years of the 20th century must have been like for proud Russian patriots and nationalists.

First, the European empire suddenly and wholly collapsed. East Germany, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Rumania, Bulgaria all broke away to join the West. The Red Army came home, undefeated, but also unwanted and even detested.

OBAMA AFRAID OF NUKES IN MANHATTAN: WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

The IRS just issued tax guidance for bitcoin and other virtual currencies. They
classify bitcoins as property, instead of a currency, where tax rules of stocks
and barter will apply. It seems, as always, that Wall Street wins and people
lose.

It essentially means Wall Street has a new
asset class to exploit at low capital gains rates, and retail businesses get the
benefit of low transaction fees of the Bitcoin payment system without extra
accounting; but everyday people who use it as a currency must report every
single transaction for tax collection.

The U.S. government will treat Bitcoin as
property for tax purposes, applying rules it uses to govern stocks and barter
transactions, the Internal Revenue Service said in its first substantive ruling
on the issue.

Today’s IRS guidance will provide certainty
for Bitcoin investors, along with income-tax liability that wasn’t specified
before. Purchasing a $2 cup of coffee with Bitcoins bought for $1 would trigger
$1 in capital gains for the coffee drinker and $2 of gross income for the coffee
shop.

The IRS, faced with a choice of treating
Bitcoins like currency or property, chose property. That decision could reduce
the volume of transactions conducted with the virtual currency, said Pamir
Gelenbe, a venture partner at Hummingbird Ventures, which invests in technology
businesses.

“It’s challenging if you have to think about
capital gains before you buy a cup of coffee,” he said.

49% of U.S. CITIZENS BELIEVE the U.S. GOVERNMENT is Trying to KILL THEM

Regime Change in Ukraine and the IMF’s Bitter “Economic Medicine”

In the days following the Ukraine coup d’Etat of February 23, leading to the ousting of a duly elected president, Wall Street and the IMF–in liaison with the US Treasury and the European Commission in Brussels– had already set the stage for the outright takeover of Ukraine’s monetary system. The EuroMaidan protests leading up to “regime change” and the formation of an interim government were followed by purges within key ministries and government bodies.

The Governor of the National Bank of Ukraine (NBU) Ihor Sorkin was fired on February 25th and replaced by a new governor: Stepan Kubiv.[right]

Stepan Kubiv is a member of Parliament of the Rightist Batkivshchyna “Fatherland” faction in the Rada led by the acting Prime Minister Arseny Yatsenyuk (founded by Yulia Tymoshenko in March 1999). He previously headed Kredbank, a Ukrainian financial institution largely owned by EU capital, with some 130 branches throughout Ukraine. Ukraine Central Bank Promises Liquidity To Local Banks, With One Condition, Zero Hedge, February 27, 2014).

Kubic is no ordinary bank executive. He was one of the first field “commandants” of the EuroMaidan riots alongside Andriy Parubiy co-founder of the Neo-Nazi Social-National Party of Ukraine (subsequently renamed Svoboda) and Dimitry Yarosh, leader of the Right Sector Brown Shirts, which now has the status of a political party.

Who Aims to Benefit From Ukrainian IMF Bailout?

Revealed: The Washington Post compromised Edward Snowden

In early May 2013, employees of the National Security Agency knew something big was up. Rumors began flying around the agency that there had been a massive security leak. Although few of NSA’s civilian and military rank and file knew the extent of the compromise, NSA director General Keith Alexander, his closest aides, and NSA’s internal security “Q Group” knew the ramifications about what was known to them about the leak. Washington Post reporter Barton Gellman had received a number of classified documents from a source in Hawaii. After Gellman shared the documents with his editors at the Post, the newspaper, rather than treating the documents and details about their release as a protected First Amendment issue, decided to contact NSA. Senior Washington Post officials described to NSA the nature of the documents and details about what they contained. According to WMR’s sources at NSA, the revelations by the Post sent the NSA into a frenzy of counter-intelligence activity. The NSA also alerted the FBI, which also mobilized its resources to find the leaker. The actual source of the leak, Honolulu-based Booz Allen Hamilton contractor Ed Snowden, never planned on fleeing the United States to escape what would have been a certain arrest and incarceration. However, even off in Hawaii, the NSA Regional Security Operations Center in Kunia on Oahu was made aware of the fact that NSA headquarters in Fort Meade, Maryland was putting out the word that there had been a major leak of classified information and that “all hands” should stand by for the inevitable fallout. Upon hearing of the compromise of the leak by the Post to NSA, Snowden reasoned that it would not be long before he would receive the dreaded “knock on the door.” It is believed by some within NSA that Snowden never intended to leak the entire tranche of documents at one time to the media, but, when it was apparent that NSA security and the FBI were on the case, Snowden quickly downloaded tens of thousands of pages of classified documents to a few high-capacity thumb drives, booked at flight on Cathay Pacific, and flew off to Hong Kong on May 20. As part of the disinformation campaign against Snowden, the media began circulating stories that Snowden abandoned his girlfriend without notice and left boxes filled with items in his garage. Read the entire article

How to Steal an Airplane: From 9/11 to MH370

Demography Is Destiny—In Crimea And In The U.S.

Demography is destiny not just in American politics, but global geopolitics. Mysteriously, the American Main Stream Media is suddenly capable of understanding the consequences of ethnic identity, mass immigration, and demographic displacement—but only when analyzing Politically Incorrect subjects like Putin’s Russia. The true importance of this foreign quarrel, however, is not that we need root for one side or the other in the Ukraine, but rather must understand that the forces at work also apply here—for example, in the rapidly-Mexicanizing American Southwest.

The results are in in from the Crimea. Anywhere from 93 to 95 percent of the voters have chosen to reunite with the Rodina. [Crimeans vote in referendum on whether to break away from Ukraine, join Russia, by Carol Morello, Pamela Constable, and Anthony Faiola, Washington Post, March 16, 2014] While the high percentage may suggest fraud, it may be actually legitimate—after all, as Slate’s Dave Weigel argued, in 2012 Barack Obama quite literally won 100% of the vote in some black districts. [If We Lose, It Was Stolen, by David Weigel, Slate, November 14, 2012]

Sen. Ted Cruz offered the subtle geopolitical insight that the situation in the Crimea is a battle of “good vs. evil.” Even Tea Party Republicans seemingly feel it is safer to engage in saber rattling against a nuclear power than give a plain statement of opposition to Amnesty. [“Exclusive: Sen Cruz Describes Ukraine vs. Russia as ‘Good vs. Evil’” by Awr Hawkins, Breitbart, March 6, 2014]

On Abby Martin, freedom and tolerance

RT presenter Abby Martin has bought herself a reputation as a 9/11 sceptic and a vocal opponent of Israeli‘s policies .Tuesday, she denounced Russian action in Crimea while she was live on air. She said she ‘would not sit here and apologise or defend (Russian) military aggression,’ before saying her ‘heart went out’ to the Ukrainian people whom she described as ‘the real losers here.’ Ms Martin hosts on the American version of the channel and made her statement at the end of her show. She said: ‘Before I wrap up the show, I wanted to say something from my heart about the ongoing political crisis in Ukraine and Russia’s military occupation of Crimea. ‘Just because I work here, for RT, doesn’t mean I don’t have editorial independence and I can’t stress enough how strongly I am against any military intervention in sovereign nations’ affairs.’ ‘What Russia did is wrong!’ Following Martin’s announcement, many western media outlets were quick to denounce the ‘Kremlin’s funded’ TV network and its authoritarian manner, but the fact that Martin openly criticised the Russian government proves the opposite. Martin’s statement means that Russia is far more respectful of freedom of speech and thought than our so called ‘Free West.’ Can you imagine a BBC presenter standing up against the British Government? Not anymore I guess. In the continent, the clumsy ‘socialist’ French Government couldn’t even tolerate the quanelle. The French media remained silent when France Government launch a war against Dieudonne, France’s most popular Comedian. And what about Fox /CNN News, do they denounce American interventionism in such an open manner? Read the entire article

Ukraine Crisis - What You're Not Being Told

)

Israel: A significant shift in U.S. public opinion…? And what if the answer is “Yes”?

A recent public opinion poll asked Americans which of two options they would favour if a two-state solution to the Israel/Palestine conflict was no longer on the table. (It is in the rhetoric of leaders and diplomats but not in reality). The two options were:“The continuation of Israel’s Jewish majority (presumably this assumes permanent Israeli occupation of the West Bank and continuing ethnic cleansing of it by stealth) even if it means that Palestinians will not have citizenship and full rights.”“One democratic state for all in which Jews and Arabs would be equal.”Only 24 percent supported the continuation of things as they are.According to the poll, 65 percent of those asked for their opinion preferred the one state option.What explains this?Is it that an apparent majority of Americans are at last understanding and supporting the need and rights of the Palestinians for justice, or is it something else – an indication that while they are not much concerned about the rights of the Palestinians, an apparent majority of Americans are fed up with an Israel they rightly perceive to be the obstacle to peace?While I was thinking about my own answer to this question I read a magnificent piece by Gideon Levy in Ha’aretz with the headline AIPAC the Kremlin of U.S. Jewry. In this article Gideon, who along with Amira Hass is the conscience of Israeli journalism, explained, very convincingly, why AIPAC is in reality “anti-Israel”.Here, slightly shortened and with my emphasis added, is what he wrote.

The Rise of Ukrainian Right-Wing Nationalists Pt. 1

What Europe Should Know about US Mass Surveillance

Address to investigative panel of the European Parliament looking into the nature and scope of U.S. surveillance conducted by the National Security Agency and its partner agencies in Europe. Following the statement are answers to written questions posed by the panel to Mr. Snowden. The original statement is available here as a pdf.

– Introductory Statement:

I would like to thank the European Parliament for the invitation to provide testimony for your inquiry into the Electronic Mass Surveillance of EU Citizens. The suspicionless surveillance programs of the NSA, GCHQ, and so many others that we learned about over the last year endanger a number of basic rights which, in aggregate, constitute the foundation of liberal societies.

The first principle any inquiry must take into account is that despite extraordinary political pressure to do so, no western government has been able to present evidence showing that such programs are necessary. In the United States, the heads of our spying services once claimed that 54 terrorist attacks had been stopped by mass surveillance, but two independent White House reviews with access to the classified evidence on which this claim was founded concluded it was untrue, as did a Federal Court.

Looking at the US government's reports here is valuable. The most recent of these investigations, performed by the White House's Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, determined that the mass surveillance program investigated was not only ineffective – they found it had never stopped even a single imminent terrorist attack – but that it had no basis in law. In less diplomatic language, they discovered the United States was operating an unlawful mass surveillance program, and the greatest success the program had ever produced was discovering a taxi driver in the United States transferring $8,500 dollars to Somalia in 2007.

After noting that even this unimpressive success – uncovering evidence of a single unlawful bank transfer – would have been achieved without bulk collection, the Board recommended that the unlawful mass surveillance program be ended. Unfortunately, we know from press reports that this program is still operating today.